Defination USlegal.com
Merits of case are the essential issues or the main question which is at issue in an action. It is the substantive rights presented by an action or the strict legal rights of the parties to an action. It is distinguished from those mere questions of practice which every court regulates for itself, and from all matters which depend upon the discretion or favor of the court[1].

Merits
The real or substantial grounds of an action or defence in contradiction to some technical or collateral matter raised in the course of the case. [S.69, Presidency Small Causes Courts Act (15 of 1882)].

In practice a matter of substance, as distinguished from matter of form; the real or substantial grounds of action or defence, in contradistinction to some technical or collateral matter raised in the course of the suit.

The substantive issue that divide the parties in a legal dispute, as distinguished from arguments about procedural or jurisdictional issues. (CRAIG R. DUCAT- Constitutional Interpretation).

"Decision 'upon merits' means a decision not merely upon formal points". Staffordshire Ry. V. Lond & NW Ry., 6 WR (Eng.) 54.

The word 'merits' should be understood as meaning the strict legal rights of the parties, as contradistinguished from those question of mere practice which every Court regulates for itself, and from all matters which depends upon the discretion or favor of the Court[2].

Where the word is used in speaking of the determination of a prosecution on the merits it implies a consideration of substance, not of form: of legal rights; not of mere defects of procedure, or the technicalities thereof[3].

"The term 'MERITS OF THE CASE" applied to criminal proceedings, must means the justice of the case in reference to the guilt or innocence of the prisoner of the offence with which he is charged; and then as to his defence on the merits, this means a substantial and not formal or technical defects to the charge[4]."

A trail of the merits of an action generally means the elicitation of evidence in support of the averments of fact set out in the pleadings[5].

• Merits of the case: The intrinsic rights and wrongs in a dispute as determined by the substantial facts of case itself[6].
• Merits: The real matter in question as opposed to technicalities. A matter of substance, as distinguished from a matter of form[7].
• Trial on the Merits: A trail on the substantive issues of a case, as opposed to a motion hearing or interlocutory matter[8].
• Acquittal on Merits: An acquittal after trail on a consideration of the evidence as distinguished from acquittals occurring due to technical defects such as want of sanction, weakness of prosecution evidence, by benefit of doubt or on insufficiency of evidence etc. (Jogendra v. Lingaraj, AIR 1970 Ori 91,92)[9].

Section 499, Explanation V of IPC, 1860: Merits of case (further Research Required) decided in Court or conduct of witnesses and others concerned- It is not defamation to express in good faith any opinion whatsoever with respect to the merits of any case, civil or criminal, which has been decided by a Court of Justice, or regarding the conduct of any person as a party, witness or agent, in any such case, or the character of such person, as far as his character appears in that conduct, and nothing else.

Substantial Question of Law: It means having substance, essential, real, of sound worth, important or considerable. It is to understood as something in contradistinction with technical, of no substance or consequence, or academic merely. [SC on words and phases by Justice R P Sethi, a Former Judge of SC as cited in Ayithi Appalanaidu v. Petla Papamma, AIR 2011 AP 172, para 18] [CPC, S. 100].

Substantive question of law, within the last clause of S. 100 of the CPC, does not mean a substantive question of general importance, but a substantial question of law as between the parties in the case in the case involved.

The proper test for determining whether a question of law rose in the case is substantial, would be whether it is of general public importance or whether it directly and substantially affects the rights of the parties.

Substantial Rights: A right to the equal enjoyment of fundamental rights, privileges and immunities, distinguished from procedural rights.

Where a point of law has not been pleaded or is found to be arising between the parties in the absence of any factual format, a litigant should not be allowed to raise as a 'substantial question of law' in second appeal under S.100 of CPC. The mere appreciation of the facts, the documentary evidence or the meaning of the entries and the contents of the document cannot be held to be raising a substantial question of law.

To be substantial question of law involving in the case there must be a foundation for it laid in the pleadings and the question should emerge from the sustainable findings of the facts arrived at by Court of facts and it must be necessary to decide that question of law for a just and proper decision of the case.

A question of law arsis incidentally or collaterally, having no bearing on the find outcome, will not be a substantial question of law. Any question of law which affects the final decision in a case is a substantial question of law as between the parties.

SLPcivil No 13005 of 2020 – case status- string oder- find- experion

To be a question of law 'involving in the case' there must be first a foundation for it laid in the pleadings and the question should emerges form the substantial findings of fact arrived at by Court of facts and it must be necessary to decide that question of law for a just and proper decision of the case. It will differ from case to case.

Five tests have been used to decide whether a substantial question of law is involved. They are as follow (i) whether directly or indirectly its affects substantial rights of the parties, (ii) the question is of general public importance, (iii) whether it is an open question in the sense that the issue has not been settled by pronouncement of the SC or the Privacy Council or by the Federal Court, (iv) the issue is not free from difficulties; (e) if it calls for a discussion for alternative view. A question of fact becomes become a question of law if the finding is contrary to evidence or is without any evidence or material.

Substantial question of law means that (i) the question involved must be one of law; (ii) it must be substantial question. The question of law, to be substantial must be in regard to which there is difference of opinion between the different courts.

The question of appreciation of evidence is not a substantial question of law under Sec 100 of the Code.

The mere application of facts, the documentary evidence or the meaning of entries and the contents of the documents cannot be held to be raising a substaintual question of law. But where it is found that the first appellate court has assured jurisdiction which did not vest in it, the same can be adjudicated in the second appeal, treating it as a substantial question of law.

A question of whether the time was essence of the agreement and whether plaintiffs were ready and willing to perform their part of the contract cannot be considered as substantial question of law.

The question as to whether the suit was barred by res judicata and whether the suit was barred by limitation were no doubt substantial questions.

End-Notes:

1. https://definitions.uslegal.com/m/merits-of-case/
2. Page 3260: Advanced Law Lexicon, Shakil Ahmad Khan, 5th Edition.
3. Ibid 2.
4. Ibid 2.
5. Ibid 2.
6. Ibid 2.
7. Page 483, Legal & Commercial Dictionary, A.N. Saha, Fifth Edition
8. Page 5285: Advanced Law Lexicon, Shakil Ahmad Khan, 5th Edition.
9. Page 79: Advanced Law Lexicon, Shakil Ahmad Khan, 5th Edition.